among them. The people of Syria were engaged in military expeditions and jihad, and thus possessed knowledge of jihad and military affairs that others did not. For this reason, scholars held Abū Ishāq al-Fazārī’s book on this subject in high esteem and considered al-Awzā'ī more knowledgeable in this field than other scholars of the major centres.

As for “Quranic exegesis,” those most knowledgeable about it are the people of Mecca, for they were the students of Ibn 'Abbās, such as Mujāhid, 'Atā ibn Abī Rabāh, 'Ikrima—the freedman of Ibn 'Abbās—and his other students, including Tāwūs, Abū al-Sha'thā', Sa'īd ibn Jubayr, and others like them. The same applies to the people of Kufa, including the students of Ibn Mas'ūd; in certain aspects of this field, they distinguished themselves above others. Among the scholars of Medina versed in Quranic exegesis was Zayd ibn Aslam, from whom Mālik learned exegesis, as did Zayd’s son, 'Abd al-Rahmān. 'Abd Allāh ibn Wahb, in turn, learned it from 'Abd al-Rahmān.

“Reports with incomplete chains,” when transmitted through multiple routes free of deliberate collusion or unintentional coincidence, are certainly authentic. A transmitted account is either truthful, corresponding to what is reported, or false, its narrator having either deliberately lied or made a mistake. Once deliberate falsehood and error are ruled out, it is undoubtedly true. Thus, when a report comes through two or more sources, and it is known that the narrators have not colluded over their differing accounts, and that agreement of this kind cannot occur by coincidence